Talk:Supernatural
This page seems to be lumping together a number of topics which, as evidenced by the size of the page already, could easily support their own articles. Ghosts, angels, devils, demons, gremlins, banshees and magic are all quite specific subjects. I'd have thought the formatting used on computer would do more justice to each specific subject, providing a good overview of the subject as this article already does, but leaving the individual manifestations of the supernatural their own articles. --8of5 12:46, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :The problem is that each of these things has like ten names each, and all are different versions based on individual origins or variations, like the difference between a devil and demon, or a ghost and a phantom, which isn't well defined and gives uncertain ground on where to divvy up the article.. I'd prefer these things remained lumped together to prevent disagreements about which aspects we're presenting, they all originate in superstition/supernatural myth. -- Captain MKB 12:52, June 23, 2010 (UTC) Well the way you just described it rather shows how small that issue is, we just have to have a separate article for all things ghostly, a separate one for all things demony, and then articles for the things with more specific names too... It's not that hard. --8of5 13:03, June 23, 2010 (UTC) Right, took me a moment to find a comparable example: , another confusing field with multiple names for the same thing, but we dont just lump Every sort of ship together, we just identify the similar ones when they are most similar. For instance, cargo vessel, cargo freighter, cargo transport, cargo ship, and mining freighter all redirect to freighter. While tanker and transport, which could also be generically referred to as freighters, can find enough defining characteristics to justify their own articles and each have a number of redirects using alternate terms too. --8of5 13:18, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :I'm not sure I agree with you on this case. -- Captain MKB 13:51, June 23, 2010 (UTC) In my head I refer to these sort of articles as generics; they generically describe the concept, of the supernatural, or a computer, and then have links off to other articles which describe specific subjects within that field. Gremlins, ghosts or demons are not generic ambiguous ideas that have to be included in the generic, they are specific manifestations of the supernatural, and like any other specific subject require articles of their own. Look at the article, it already contains an article on gremlins, so clearly defined that it demands its own sub-section. It is already treated like a separate article within this article. So why keep it within? If a user searches for gremlins they get redirected to an article about loads of stuff, when they could just find a page about gremlins. --8of5 14:53, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :But gremlins are very similar to the 'phantoms' scotty described as performing gremlin-like problems in another story. and then phantoms can also be ghosts. there is a lot of gray areas between these concepts that would cause some issues in separating them into a number of short articles with like definitions. :now, i understand your point that 'the supernatural' could be an overall article and that 'supernatural beings' could branch off from there on its own, but the varied sorts of supernatural beings might not as easily be split off into individual articles as you suggest, based on my observations that they are often invoked as identical types of entities with slightly different names and sometimes-identical, sometimes different attributes. -- Captain MKB 19:54, June 23, 2010 (UTC) Well it's just the same as the freighter situation I described earlier, or the fuzzy boarder between planet/planetoid/dwarf planet, or the neatening up job I did with alternate reality a while ago. Taking that latter example, an alternate reality, technically, is just an alternate timeline, while an alternate universe is a very different thing, a wholly different place with different rules of physics etc. Yet many sources refer to timeline/realities using the term universe because of the common misconception/lack of technical knowledge. For that and this case we just have to find something close to a definition of the subject in question, and leave enough background notes and disambiguation to clear up the rest. So taking your example: The gremlin as a concept is a supernatural being notable for it's mischievous nature. While a phantom/spirit/ghost has a stronger general association with the afterlife and have more spectral characteristics. There's some crossover with terminology in places, but they can be defined, and where that crossover occurs there simply needs to be enough information in the articles to explain it. --8of5 20:23, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :The articles would simply end up being duplicates of each other in many places, I can't support that kind of confusion. I agree with you that supernatural beings could be separate from the supernatural, but splitting supernatural beings up based on vague definitions and alternate names would be tedious and would lead to confusion. i'm keeping the best interests of logical ordering of the information and the good of the wiki in mind when I say that that change absolutely shouldn't occur in the article. -- Captain MKB 20:43, June 23, 2010 (UTC) Lol, I can't believe you are actually arguing for making carbon copy articles on the other discussion page while flatly rejecting the idea of separate articles for totally separate subjects with some areas of crossover here! Crazy! A ghost is not a gremlin, a gremlin is not an angel, an angel is not a witch or a werewolf, a vampire or a demon. These are totally different subjects. Scotland, England and Wales all share a culture, are all part of the United Kingdom, yet are all different too. This is just the same. --8of5 20:49, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :The fact that you are arguing for carbon-copies in one discussion that you started to question my edit and against carbon-copies in another discussion where you contested my suggested edit pretty much proves that you are also just arguing on the basis of wanting to pick the opposite of my view, doesn't it? :There's no Star Trek citation that Ghosts are different from Phantoms, is there? how do we justify this? :There are clear borders between Scotland and Wales that justify their individual articles, and we keep the overall UK article to define their location. I'm saying that there is no clear definition saying which groups of supernatural beings are different from others, leaving us with question marks as to where these divisions should take place. -- Captain MKB 20:54, June 23, 2010 (UTC) Think this supernatural stuff must be getting to you, you’re sounding a bit paranoid! If anyone is arguing for the sake of arguments is must be you, as you clearly aren't even reading my reasoning! You might note I clumped ghosts and phantoms together in my previous reply. I'm not suggesting we make an article for every single possible name of a supernatural being. I am suggesting that there are a variety of supernatural beings, some of them, like the freighter and alternate universe examples I gave above, are known by multiples names. So for ghosts and phantoms, and sprits, I would indeed suggest they all redirect to one page on the subject of ghostly beings, which are altogether quite a different subject to that of gremlins, for instance. There's a little crossover in gremlin-like occurrences sometimes being attributed to more ghostly name, but there's a heck of a lot different about them too! So the ghostly article would mainly be about ghosts, how they’re spooky and floaty and see-through, and mention how sometimes they do things a bit like gremlins, and then you click through to the gremlin articles to learn all about how gremlins are such trouble makers! --8of5 21:09, June 23, 2010 (UTC) :Guys, I'm honestly not sure if you've worked your issues out or not, so I'm just gonna say; stop sniping at each other on discussion pages, and please try to resolve any remaining issues for the good of MB. :On the article at hand: Mike, you argued for nearly exact copies in another discussion and I agreed with you, but now you're arguing against making articles that are actually going to have more detail and more differentiation than those articles and I honestly don't understand your reasoning. So, I'm going to agree with 8 on this one, ghostly beings need their own, gremlins their own, etc. Having them all jammed together on this page doesn't make sense to me. :/--Long Live the United Earth 02:07, June 24, 2010 (UTC) And Capt, we've discussed this before. I've asked you many times to stop grouping large numbers of articles together under a blanket page. Some of them are just trying to bring too many very different things together and call them the same. These discussions usually end with you telling me to sod off, but we have discussed this. – AT2Howell 14:08, June 24, 2010 (UTC) :Well, first off, I think AT2Howell should sod off :) (Sorry, too easy) However, in the face of the overwhelming support for 8of5's suggested alteration, I'd say splitting this article has community support and can proceed forthwith. -- Captain MKB 14:17, June 24, 2010 (UTC) "lol" at Mike's opening to AT2 :P --8of5 14:22, June 24, 2010 (UTC)